Title: Tathea
Author: Anne Perry
Shadow Mountain (Salt Lake City), 1999.
Hardcover: 522 pages.
ISBN: 1-57347-536-9
1999 AML Award: Novel
Reviewed by Darlene Young
I read with interest Melissa Proffit’s and Eric Eliason’s reviews of Anne Perry’s Tathea in the recent issue of Irreantum. I was relieved to read of Proffitt’s disappointment. I too feel that Tathea did not succeed, and it’s nice to know I’m not alone. Proffitt feels that Tathea fails because it fails as fantasy. In his response, Eliason does not completely refute her assertion. So what if it doesn’t conform to specific rules of fantasy? Neither do “Frankenstein,” “1984,” “Brave New World” and “Utopia.” But, Eliason goes on, it may not actually belong to the fantasy genre. “It fits much better in the philosophical/moral-treatise-in-story-form genre of books which occasionally have fantasy elements but are not fantasy per se.” He cites Bach’s “Jonathon Livingston Seagull” and Mandino’s “Richest Man in Babylon” as examples of this genre.
I agree with Eliason here. Like these books, Tathea IS a treatise thinly disguised as literature. And as such, it is moderately successful. Let me admit here that I am NOT in the intended audience for such books. While I was reading Tathea, it was at just those times when characters began musing philosophically that I found myself screaming “Enough already!” in the same way I did when John Galt went ON and ON beating the dead horse at the end of “Atlas Shrugged.” As to whether or not Tatheasucceeds in this other genre is not something I am qualified to decide; I suppose I could leave that to Eliason. But one of his points on this subject is bothersome: he says, “Within the conventions of this genre, Tathea not only succeeds but also excels,” apparently because “the oblique stabs at truth found in [Bach, Rand, and Mandino] . . . pale in comparison to Perry’s profound exploration of the fundamental metaphysical conditions of human existence and agency.” Eliason seems to be saying that Perry’s novel is better than the others in its true genre because it uses as its basis the revealed truth of the gospel instead of some other, less true philosophy. I don’t feel this is a fair way to judge a book. Even in this genre, a critic should judge the quality of a WORK, not the quality of the worldview the author is preaching.
Leaving that aside, what I DO know is fiction: fantasy, sci-fi, and just plain old fiction. And as this kind of literature, Tathea fails. The STORY was weak. Most characters were flat. The writing was often boring and strained. And to a point, Eliason even agrees. “But,” he argues in defense of the book, “if Perry’s attempt at times seems a little strained in its stylistic earnestness and expansive scope, this is understandable considering the circumstances and should not detract from the overall success of the effort.” What circumstances should we consider? Should we excuse poor writing because the book has “a good message”? (What is it about this point of his that reminds me of our AML-List discussion of Feature Films for Families?) Oh, no. This very philosophy is what is hindering the progress of truly great Mormon literature, in my opinion. Eliason says Tathea is “Mormon literature in the fullest and richest sense of all that the term potentially implies.” I answer, “No, no, and again I say NO!” Mormon literature CAN include this great “sweeping panoramic look at LDS ideas and concepts” AND have a well-wrought story without the “ethereal prose that has understandably struck some readers as boring and detached in places.” Boring prose is NOT a prerequisite of showing the “right sort of reverence” Eliason believes is necessary to Tathea‘s subject. Several examples come to mind of authors who have succeded in writing with reverence in addition to glittering prose that keeps us hooked and is not boring. (Scott Card’s “Saints” comes to mind.)
Noble as Perry’s goal was (Proffit quotes her as saying that the story was “for those who will take spiritual doctrine only if it is dressed as a story”) there is NO excuse for poor writing.
I am glad that Perry thought of something new to do. (It may be true that there are no other Mormon fiction works set on one of Elohim’s and Jehova’s other peopled works. However, I recall a short story in Bradbury’s “Illustrated Man” in which space travelers arrive at a planet right after Christ ascended from there . . .; but that’s beside the point.) If nothing else, her experiment can spark ideas in some of the better writers among us. But let us, as readers and critics, not make excuses. Let us demand and expect quality writing and development in addition to quality theme.